Re: I-D ACTION:draft-hardaker-snmp-session-sm-00.txt

>>>>> On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 19:31:24 -0400, "Sharon Chisholm" <[email protected]> said:

Sharon> I've only skimmed the draft, but I suspect a MIB to do cleanup
Sharon> may not be the best approach. If things are setup using
Sharon> non-SNMP means, shouldn't tear down be done that way?

The MIB is more for super-management.  The draft already supports
either side randomly dropping the session, and will support (IE, its
not there now) a notification mechanism to the other side that one
side intentionally dropped a connection.  This will all be
"within-SBSM-messages".  Greater ability may be controlled by the
accompanying MIB module, but the details haven't been worked out.

Thanks for the comments!

Sharon> If I understood things from my quick skim, I think I like the
Sharon> approach of not using SNMP to set up the session since it
Sharon> avoids all the bootstrap issues and is easier to sell to
Sharon> people who don't think they want to use SNMP for
Sharon> configuration.

That was the primary goal; reuse of existing authentication
mechanisms.  Things like password databases, radius, ... are all
heavily used and there is no reason they can't be used within SNMP as
well.


-- 
Wes Hardaker
Sparta